Problems with Good and Evil: Is an opportunistic businessman evil or smart?

The rivalry between Wakem and Mr. Tulliver is more than evident in this story - Tulliver openly dislikes and distrusts Wakem, as Wakem is a symbol of the industrial revolution and therefore a new age of capitalism and consumerism, and entrepreneurship in the world, while Tulliver resists change. 

But does Wakem really get pleasure in thwarting Tulliver? Is the hate mutual? I don't think that the feelings run that deep on the side of Wakem. 

Why?

Wakem's a businessman. He's a lawyer and he doesn't care personally about Tulliver; He's just making good business decisions - that Tulliver just happens to have the short end of the stick for.

Wakem isn't evil.

Now, I'm usually more in the rootin' tootin' anticapitalist peace on earth type, but right now I'll play devil's advocate, okay?

Wakem obviously has a family, and Wakem obviously has an education. He also, apparently, has the freedom to do what he wants businesswise. (I mean, as allowed by the place where he lives.) So he is willing and able to take opportunities when they arise, and even if they disadvantage another person, it was Wakem's right to do so and it's his own conscience that shall say whether or not he, say, sues Tulliver into oblivion. 

He doesn't do it because he dislikes Tulliver. He's got a family to feed. He's got rent to pay for his offices (likely) and he's got to provide money to furnish and supply his home. He has responsibilities, too. It isn't a personal thing, and Wakem could be considered a "smart businessman" because he keeps his personal life out of his business affairs. If Wakem were disadvantaged by another person, he would probably take it in stride and not develop a personal vendetta. Wakem would likely try to devise a new way to earn money and keep his 

family out of financial trouble. That's probably where Wakem and Tulliver differ.

Tulliver is sharp enough to recognize a changing world and to try to prepare his son for it. However, Tulliver is too set in his ways to change himself - and so he makes bad decisions and ends up bankrupt. If he were more flexible, more adaptable, etc., he could probably come right out of this. Instead, he accepts his fate, shrugs his shoulders and bemoans his ill fortune while cursing Wakem, bringing me to my next point.

GOOD AND EVIL.

What? Whaaaat? A businessman took your house and now you're cursing his name - isn't that going a bit far? I don't mean saying, "Damn you, Wakem!" I mean, you're literally putting his name into the family bible. 

The reason I dislike the concepts of pure good and evil: They divide everything up. It's black and white, no room for shades of gray - and there are many. There are other ways of describing things and other points of view, but when things are divided in a person's head as two shades of morality, things get left out and opportunities are missed for personal grudges and superstition. I also don't feel like the ideas of ultimate good and evil are applicable in real life without the influence of religion. I reallllyyyy feel like it's unwise to brand people and sort them into two categories.

With a heaving sigh I leave you,

--Gina Sposto